Mary Stultz and the Petticoat Theft
Two garments, two years, and the weight of Georgian justice.
👗 The Incident
On 25 September 1789, Mary Stultz was accused of stealing from William (surname lost to time) two ordinary but valuable garments:
- One flannel petticoat, worth one shilling.
- One linen shirt, also valued at one shilling.
These were not luxuries but necessities — clothes worn close to the skin, garments that marked dignity and respectability. Their theft cut as deeply into propriety as it did into property.
🏛️ The Trial at the Old Bailey
By 28 October 1789, Stultz stood in the dock at the Old Bailey. The indictment was read in solemn tones:
“Mary Stultz, you stand indicted for feloniously stealing one flannel petticoat and one linen shirt, the goods of William …”
The evidence was sufficient, and her defence, if any, did not sway the jury. In Georgian London, theft of clothing was common — but the law made little allowance for poverty or desperation.
⚖️ The Verdict & Sentence
The jury declared:
Guilty.
The judge pronounced her punishment:
Two years’ imprisonment.
For two stolen garments valued at two shillings, Mary Stultz would spend twenty-four months behind bars — a harsh measure by today’s standards, but a routine outcome in 18th-century justice.
🧠 Why It Matters
- Value in small things: Petticoats and shirts were costly relative to income — their theft struck at daily survival.
- Women before the law: Stultz’s case reflects the vulnerability of working women in London, often prosecuted for property crimes born of necessity.
- Punishment and proportionality: Two years in prison for two garments illustrates the rigidity of a system where mercy was scarce and property paramount.
Thank you for reading my writings. If you’d like to, you can buy me a coffee for just £1 and I will think of you while writing my next post! Just hit the link below…. (thanks in advance)
The Sage Page 